Migrants - What's the answer?

[DEMANN]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153591600018545&set=a.10150177977848545.310648.500628544&type=1

Have a read of this post on Facebook folks.

Demann, maybe you need to have a read, then look up the word empathy.

I have no empathy..I've read it and thought.. "So what?" I won't be preached to.

[MC Prussian]

I find the latest attitude more than hypocritical - people now calling for the government to do something for the homeless or somehow trying to convince people to invite the local homeless to their homes to live there.

 

This shouldn't be a matter of a comparison between the homeless vs. the fugitives.

 

I'm sorry, but in the end, it's rather racist. Because you prefer "your own" (nationality) over another. These people - Syrians, Kurds, Egyptians, Eritreans, etc. - are fleeing precarious situations, war zones and the scenario of death at home in search of a better and safer life someplace else. Many of them have paid over the odds for their trip to Europe, sacrificing all their savings or having lost dear family members along the way (the picture of the dead boy as a symbol for all the ones who have suffered the same fate).

 

Of course, it's shocking that at this day and age, we're still faced with refugee streams this large. But keep in mind, at one point or another in the past, there were similar movements on the European continent (including the British Isles) and each one of us might or might not be a distant product of that era, as well.

 

In the end, we're all human and should care for them. But I'm the first to hold up my hand to say that I have a hard time accepting that because it's an overwhelming feeling and a situation that I on my own would struggle to cope with. When you read the papers, you do get the initial feel that there might be a huge wave coming towards you that could crush your country. But I suppose that's just media hype and reality probably less "threatening" than that.

 

What these people need now is a first helping hand by the government, they need to be counted and registered and separated by skills and whatnot and then there can be an additional call for help to the local population to provide food or shelter or any other assistance, be it in terms of jobs or education.

[J.Lisemore]

Population is the main issue here.

 

The higher the population = more demands for schools, hospitals, houses, jobs etc...

 

Its not as easy for us to say, "right, lets do the honourable thing and let them all in", we have to think about the sensible future of this country.

 

As sympathetic as I am for these people and as selfish as this sounds, I'm more concerned for the future of my family and friends.

[MC Prussian]

Population is the main issue here.

 

The higher the population = more demands for schools, hospitals, houses, jobs etc...

 

Its not as easy for us to say, "right, lets do the honourable thing and let them all in", we have to think about the sensible future of this country.

 

As sympathetic as I am for these people and as selfish as this sounds, I'm more concerned for the future of my family and friends.

A bit of an easy excuse in the face of a demanding challenge at present.

 

The demand for housing, schools, hospitals, jobs. etc. has always been high - but you could also say the government preferred investing in other departments instead.

In the end, it's a question of priorities.

 

Plus, on the way up North, the number of fugitives is spread over the countries they pass through. So, who is "all of them"?

 

Just a fraction of the estimated 12 billion pounds that the UK invest in so-called "repressive states" as part of arms trade could go a long way when invested in the UK itself instead:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/blood-money-uks-123bn-arms-sales-to-repressive-states-8711794.html

[Wymsey]

It can't be denied that ethnic/racial tensions may arise from this.

 

Bit, on the otherhand, they'll probably be willing to do 'shitty' unskilled jobs that some currently on JSA would not do.

[leicsmac]

I have no empathy..I've read it and thought.. "So what?" I won't be preached to.

At least you are honest about such things, rather than attempting to dress up your self interest.

Of course, such an attitude will one day be responsible for the extinction (or near extinction) of humanity, but I applaud the candor.

[Buce]

A bit of an easy excuse in the face of a demanding challenge at present.

The demand for housing, schools, hospitals, jobs. etc. has always been high - but you could also say the government preferred investing in other departments instead.

In the end, it's a question of priorities.

Plus, on the way up North, the number of fugitives is spread over the countries they pass through. So, who is "all of them"?

Just a fraction of the estimated 12 billion pounds that the UK invest in so-called "repressive states" as part of arms trade could go a long way when invested in the UK itself instead:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/blood-money-uks-123bn-arms-sales-to-repressive-states-8711794.html

Surely that's a matter for the local police..?

[Bobby Hundreds]

I feel indifferent to the whole thing. As long as any refugee is processed correctly and fairly and can integrate into a secular society, then thumbs up.

[Frank to be]

At least you are honest about such things, rather than attempting to dress up your self interest.

Of course, such an attitude will one day be responsible for the extinction (or near extinction) of humanity, but I applaud the candor.

Somehow I don't think someone as immature and narrow minded as him will ever be in a position to make the big decisions

[Stadt]

Isn't most of Britain's historic wealth attributed to the industrial revolution and our creation of trade routes?

There's no doubt our nation has done some bad things but it has also contributed immensely to the world.

In any case I don't see why we should feel any guilt for things we played no part in. During the industrial revolution it was people like us putting ourselves in danger to make the ruling classes extremely wealthy. In the modern day many British citizens are still living below and around the poverty line. Why should they feel guilty? Why should they be the ones to bare the brunt of the inevitable social problems that arise when you accept thousands of refugees?

The only reason why is compassion for our fellow man, and that's a very good reason, and is why I support opening our doors to the migrants. Guilt is nothing to do with it.

Good post this,

Never thought I'd say that

[johnny the fox]

They are free to move around this country once they enter, he doesn't personally pick where they live.

you miss the point..his council area has not opted to or have delegated  any in the first place... 

[Webbo]

you miss the point..his council area has not opted to or have delegated  any in the first place... 

Well he doesn't run the council and there's nothing to stop an immigrant moving there once they're in the country.

[BlueSi13]

The only people who will suffer if we take in thousands of migrants/refugees, are the most vulnerable already in this country. The more we take in the more it will affect. We have had the last five years or so telling us how terrible and in humane their plight is, surely we can't deepen that plight significantly, we have to be sensible here.

 

It's also terrible for the migrants themselves.  Opening your doors to vast numbers of (largely third-world) migrants and plonking them somewhere does nothing but enforce segregation and ghettoisation with little chance of fully assimilating them into what is (by and large) a very liberal secular democracy.  This then begins to invoke resentment and potentially violence between communities.  This is something Labour got horrifically wrong post-2000 with their open-door immigration policy, something towns up and down the country will struggle to cope with for generations to come (although vote for Corbyn and what we saw during this period will be like having a starter compared to the main course).

 

What we need is a level-head, sure we must help those suffering the most, but we cannot be held hostage by people smugglers and those simply trying to get a free lunch.  We need a system that is fair to this country, but also give's migrants a chance to succeed and a route out of poverty.   It was interesting to read quite a few comments from our friends at the Guardian, the types that absolutely despise the Conservatives but couldn't help but concede through gritted teeth that FOR NOW, Cameron, by hook or by crook, may be getting this right.  Not the majority of them sure, but some which I found rather surprising.

[bmt]

I think there is a major point missed here that there is a difference between migrants and refugees. There is nothing to say most war refugees (which obviously the people fleeing Syria) will not return home after the conflict is ended. I think it shows an exceptional level of arrogance to suggest they would come into our country for the long haul despite cultural and religious barriers, and not return home to where many of them have had jobs, friends and family once the conflict has ended. There is a lot of talk in this thread about loss of culture, differences within groups, long term infrastructure hits etc etc which assumes that any number of people we allow to seek refuge in this country will try and stay here after. Sure there will be difficulties with taking a large influx of people even temporarily but as a humanitarian issue I feel we have a responsibility as a rich nation.

[Webbo]

 I think it shows an exceptional level of arrogance to suggest they would come into our country for the long haul despite cultural and religious barriers, and not return home to where many of them have had jobs, friends and family once the conflict has ended. 

Or past experience.

[bmt]

I find the latest attitude more than hypocritical - people now calling for the government to do something for the homeless or somehow trying to convince people to invite the local homeless to their homes to live there.

 

This shouldn't be a matter of a comparison between the homeless vs. the fugitives.

 

I'm sorry, but in the end, it's rather racist. Because you prefer "your own" (nationality) over another. These people - Syrians, Kurds, Egypts, Eritreans, etc. - are fleeing precarious situations, war zones and the scenario of death at home in search of a better and safer life someplace else. Many of them have paid over the odds for their trip to Europe, sacrificing all their savings or having lost dear family members along the way (the picture of the dead boy as a symbol for all the ones who have suffered the same fate).

 

Of course, it's shocking that at this day and age, we're still faced with refugee streams this large. But keep in mind, at one point or another in the past, there were similar movements on the European continent (including the British Isles) and each one of us might or might not be a distant product of that era, as well.

 

In the end, we're all human and should care for them. But I'm the first to hold up my hand to say that I have a hard time accepting that because it's an overwhelming feeling and a situation that I on my own would struggle to cope with. When you read the papers, you do get the initial feel that there might be a huge wave coming towards you that could crush your country. But I suppose that's just media hype and reality probably less "threatening" than that.

 

What these people need now is a first helping hand by the government, they need to be counted and registered and separated by skills and whatnot and then there can be an additional call for help to the local population to provide food or shelter or any other assistance, be it in terms of jobs or education.

 

Excellent post.

[bmt]

Or past experience.

So past experience ignoring the only refugee crisis of a similar scale? There are examples for both sides

[yorkie1999]

I'd let them all settle here as long as they convert to Christianity.

[Webbo]

So past experience ignoring the only refugee crisis of a similar scale? There are examples for both sides

You genuinely think they're all or mostly going to go back? If they wanted to preserve their culture they could move to Lebanon, Jordan or Turkey where lifes a lot similar and they'd be closer to their family and friends. You reckon after the govt's given them somewhere to live, free health care and education, money to live on if they did need it they're going to turn their back on that and return to Syria?

[SMX11]

 ‘He who would do good to another must do it in minute particulars. General good is the plea of the scoundrel, hypocrite and flatterer.’

[Richmondfox]

What is coming out of this is Merkel showing her true strength and Germanys control over the EU.  One minute we have to follow EU rules or face fines/sanctions/threats regarding Cameron wanting to limit the number of people from the EU moving to the country.  We have to follow the rules set out by the EU which all members agree to, Hungary tried to do that by processing refugees but then Merkel changes them to suit her agenda proclaiming everybody is welcome in Germany.  This means that the countries between will have a constant stream of refugees and migrants undermining and over stretching their government and infrastructure that isn't designed for this.

 

I have no problem with the country aiding refugees from within Syria providing it is manageable and gradual but we don't really need to take any in, Germany has agreed to look after them all.  If they do then the country should have a temporary cap on people moving here under the freedom of movement, if Merkel can change EU wide asylum rules then we could do this.  The cap would be absorbed by all the willing men from Syria, use their skills from day one rather than sitting in processing centres or hanging around the clock tower in the city centre, work will set them free (the last line is a joke please don't be offended on behalf of someone else)  

 

I'm glad the money is coming from the overseas aid budget, maybe less will be given to countries that don't need it or being used to try to get business contracts like India.

 

BMT, what is your view on the people/migrants/human beings at Calais?  Surely you have to agree that they are in a safe country where they can and should be applying for asylum? 

[johnny the fox]

Well he doesn't run the council and there's nothing to stop an immigrant moving there once they're in the country.

stop bumming the twat.. 

[Dr The Singh]

I'd let them all settle here as long as they convert to Christianity.

stop bumming the twat.. 

how do you bum a twat??

[Wymsey]

Came across these cartoons whilst reading a few websites.

 

 

[The Year Of The Fox]

**** me the last few pages have verged on ridiculous.

 

Of course we're going to build on our green belt to accommodate a load of migrants in search of a better life.

 

The country when talking about the NHS and education IS full.

 

I'm neither for or against allowing genuine refugee's here with a low cap on them. (How many times bigger is Germany than the UK?)

 

But I'm not going to start being an apologist saying 'Sorry' nor will I clamour to get on a bandwagon of, 'Refugee's Welcome'

 

Seen this in the Express today too. Make of it what you will

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/555434/Islamic-State-ISIS-Smuggler-THOUSANDS-Extremists-into-Europe-Refugees

 

 

Meanwhile whilst we're throwing another £100m away abroad, a friend of mine is raising £500 to buy one of the Leicester Hospitals a machine which saved his life abroad. And LOROS need to raise £4m ish a year to keep themselves going. Charity begins at home Dave